26 June 2014

The Speaker of the House has announced his intent to file a lawsuit against President Obama over an alleged "misuse" of executive powers, reports Politico.

"The Constitution makes it clear that a president’s job is to faithfully execute the laws. In my view, the president has not faithfully executed the laws," said [Speaker John Boehner]. "When there are conflicts like this between the legislative branch and the administrative branch, it’s … our responsibility to stand up for this institution."

House Republicans have argued that Obama is misusing his executive powers by side-stepping Congress on immigration and other policies, including a decision to extend family leave to same-sex couples and bar federal contractors from discriminating against gay employees. ... The memo sent to the GOP conference mentioned executive actions on health care, energy, foreign policy and education, but did not delve into specific orders. The speaker’s office has not outlined what specific executive orders or actions the suit will cover, but Boehner said the lawsuit was not about convening impeachment proceedings against Obama.

The White House announced on June 16 that the President will sign a an executive order to extend LGBT non-discrimination protections to employees of federal contractors.

Boehner was "for" executive orders long before he was against them—when there was a Republican in the White House. The Ohio Republican congressman supported President George W. Bush's well-documented and extensive practice of issuing executive orders, notes Think Progress.

Bush issued hundreds of orders ... over his eight years in office. In 2001 and 2007, Boehner strongly supported unilateral actions by Bush to prevent embryonic stem-cell research involving new embryos, saying the 2001 decision “preserves the sanctity of life and allows limited research that could help millions of Americans suffering from life-threatening diseases.” He [also] endorsed a 2008 Bush executive order to limit earmarks.

President Obama has issued "about 180 executive orders" so far. That is "fewer executive orders than all but one of the other presidents since World War II," reports MSNBC.

In somewhat related news: The Supreme Court "dealt a significant blow to executive power" today by limiting the president's power to make recess appointments. The unanimous ruling found that President Obama "violated the Constitution in 2012 by appointing officials to the National Labor Relations Board during a short break in the Senate’s work." Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote the majority opinion joined by the court’s four more liberal justices.

16 June 2014

President Barack Obama will sign a an executive order that will extend LGBT non-discrimination protections to employees of federal contractors, reports the Associated Press, civil rights organizations and sources within the Administration.

The move follows years of pressure from gay rights groups for Obama to act on his own while a broader employment non-discrimination measure languishes on Capitol Hill. ... Obama has used this tactic before, signing executive orders that raise the minimum wage for federal contractors and expanding the number of workers who would be eligible for overtime pay. White House officials have cast the approach as part of the president's effort to work around a Congress that continues to be mired in gridlock.

But those moves increased the frustration among gay rights supporters who have long pressed Obama to extend workplace discrimination protections to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals working for federal contractors. The White House publicly offered little explanation as to why the president moved forward on the wage-related orders but not the anti-discrimination measure.

The announcement comes on the eve of the President's annual LGBT fundraising gala in New York City.

There currently are is no federal legislation that bans workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The Democratic-controlled Senate passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in November 2013 on a 64-32 vote. All Senate Democrats voted for its approval except Pennsylvania's Bob Casey. Ten Republicans also supported the bill.

The legislation has stalled in the Republican-led House. Majority Leader John Boehner has said there will not be a vote despite overwhelmingly support among the Democratic caucus.

ENDA passed the Democratic-controlled House in November 2007 but did not include transgender protections.

Some civil rights and LGBT groups have criticized the currently-worded ENDA for "terribly broad religious exemption[s] [that] would extend beyond churches and other houses of worship to any religiously affiliated institution, like hospitals and universities, and would allow those institutions to discriminate against people," noted the New York Times.

It is currently legal to fire people because of their sexual orientation in 29 states. It is legal to fire people for their gender identity in 32 states.

The measure, which was already approved by the Senate, passed the House on a 286 to 138 vote, as 199 Democrats joined 87 Republicans to push the bill over opposition from a bloc of 138 conservatives, who opposed the bill for a number of reasons, including the new protections for gays and lesbians.

The outcome stemmed from a broad desire from GOP leaders to get past the Violence Against Women Act issue. It was an acknowledgment that their continued opposition to a measure that had passed with broad bipartisan support in the Senate and has strong appeal with women voters was damaging the party’s image.

It
names LGBT people as underserved populations in need of specific
attention to address the unique issues they face as survivors of
intimate partner or sexual violence. It
prohibits VAWA grantee from discriminating against survivors of
violence based on sexual orientation or gender identity when providing
services. It establishes a specific purpose area to address LGBT violence at the state level.

The legislation also increases protections for Native Americans, immigrants, communities of color and students.

This historic legislation came shortly after the Centers for Disease
Control released a national prevalence survey showing that lesbian, gay
and bisexual people experience violence at the same or higher rates as
heterosexual people. It comes a year after the New York City
Anti-Violence Project's National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs
(NCAVP) found that transgender people experience sexual violence at
twice the rate of non-transgender people.

"With VAWA and beyond, the National Black Justice Coalition is
committed to taking a systematic approach to end the serial killings of Black
trans women and violence against women in general," Sharon Lettman-Hicks, NBJC Executive Director
and CEO, said in a statement to R20. "We will continue to raise awareness and visibility as well
as work closely with agencies like the Department of Justice and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and national organizations such as the NCAVP to
track, report, and expose the prevalence of violence against and within the
Black LGBT community."

"I am encouraged that our
Members of Congress were able to come together despite the polarized political
climate we live in," stated Sharon Lettman-Hicks, NBJC Executive Director
and CEO. "Protecting women, regardless of their sexual orientation or
gender identity, is bigger than political agendas and party line divides. It's
about fairness."

Speaker of the House John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor and their Republican colleagues have decided to ring in the New Year with a new round of virtual assaults on women, minorities and immigrants.

After subjecting the nation to its latest obstructionism masked as political theater in the waning days of 2012 and the early hours of 2013—otherwise known as the short-term solutions to scale the "fiscal cliff”—the House Republican leadership quickly adjourned without reauthorizing the Violence against Women Act. VAWA has been “reauthorized without fanfare since then-Senator Joe Biden spearheaded its passage in 1994,” notes The Atlantic.

The Senate version would “have extended domestic violence protections to 30 million lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals, undocumented immigrants and Native American women. No surprise that the all-male and all-White House Republican leadership are opposed to expanding protections for victims of domestic violence

On the other hand, the GOP found the time and money to continue defending the Defense of Marriage Act—a losing battle to preserve a retrograde, 1950s version of what marriage and relationships should look like.

03 January 2013

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said today that it was "disgusting" that the House adjourned without voting on a $60 billion relief package for the victims of superstorm Sandy and put the blame squarely on a fellow Republican -- House Speaker John Boehner.

Christie, who is considered a possible Republican presidential candidate four years from now, said there was "only one group to blame, the Republican Party and Speaker Boehner." ... Christie in an angry news conference decried the "selfishness and duplicity," the "palace intrigue," "the callous indifference to the people of our state."

The governor said his four calls to Boehner Tuesday night went unanswered, but he said he spoke to the House speaker today. Christie would not disclose any details of the conversation, but clearly his anger over the no-vote was not mollified. Following Christie's press conference Republican representatives from New York and New Jersey announced that the speaker promised a vote on the bill on Jan. 15.

Despite a late-stage intervention by Vice President Joe Biden, House Republican leaders failed to advance the Senate's 2012 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, an embattled bill that would have extended domestic violence protections to 30 million LGBT individuals, undocumented immigrants and Native American women.

"The House leadership would not bring it up, just like they wouldn't bring up funding for Sandy [hurricane damage] last night," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a key backer of the Senate version of the bill, in an interview with HuffPost. "I think they are still so kowtowing to the extreme on the right that they're not even listening to the moderates, and particularly the women, in their caucus who are saying they support this."

A GOP source told The Huffington Post that, during a closed-door meeting of the House Republican Conference, lawmakers gave a green light to including language in the 113th Congress rules package that authorizes the House legal team, known as the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), to keep paying outside counsel to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. The proposed House rules package also states that BLAG continues to "speak for" the House in its defense of DOMA ...

A spokesman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Thursday slammed Republicans for taking "the extraordinary measure" of using the opening day rules package of the new Congress to authorize themselves to keep defending DOMA. "Today, House Republicans will send a clear message to LGBT families: Their fiscal responsibility mantra does not extend to their efforts to stand firmly on the wrong side of the future," said Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill.

Hammill also noted that the rules package "for the first time" explicitly states that BLAG speaks for the full House on DOMA matters -- something he said is definitely not the case.

19 April 2012

House Speaker John Boehner hasn't "thought much about" the proposed Employment Nondiscrimination Act and claims that "ample laws" protect gay and transgender employees from discrimination, reports Chris Johnson at the Washington Blade.

Although the administration insists it will work with Congress to pass legislation in lieu of an executive order barring federal contractors from discriminating against LGBT workers, Boehner seemed unaware of ENDA in response to a question from the Washington Blade, saying, “I haven’t seen the bill. I haven’t thought much about it.”

Asked whether passage of ENDA might alleviate the 8.2 percent unemployment rate if employers were barred from firing LGBT workers, Boehner said “ample laws” are in place and deferred further comment to the House Committee on Education & the Workforce. The committee didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

"No one should face discrimination in the workforce," Boehner said. "There are ample laws already in place to deal with this. Having been the chairman of the Education & Workforce Committee, I’m quite familiar with employment law. But if there are further changes that are necessary, I’m sure the committee will look at it."

Even if Boehner were to bring the bill to a vote, it is unlikely to pass the House where Republican lawmakers hold the majority. ENDA has 161 co-sponsors in the House, far short of the 218 votes that would be needed for passage.

Currently there are no federal laws or regulations that bar employers from firing workers based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. It is perfectly legal to fire or discriminate against someone because they are gay in 29 states. It is also legal to fire or discriminate against someone because they are transgender is legal in 34 states.

"If the speaker is so familiar with employment law he should know it’s perfectly legal to fire LGBT people in most states," Human Rights Campaign spokesman Michael Cole-Schwartz said. "This attitude is precisely why we need congressional hearings on an inclusive ENDA so the costs of employment discrimination are put on full display."

Last week, the Obama Administration announced that it would not sign off on a proposed executive order that would ban anti-LGBT discrimination among federal contractors.

05 April 2012

A federal appeals court in Boston heard oral arguments Wednesday on the landmark rulings that found a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. The hearings were also the first time that DOMA has been argued in a federal appeals court.

The historic hearings in the First Circuit were followed two July 2010 rulings by a federal judge in Boston that struck down Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act. Section Three prohibits federal recognition of same-sex couples and denies all federal benefits, such as Social Security and health care. U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro, a Nixon appointee, ruled in two separate cases brought by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Boston-based Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD).

Stuart Delery, who’s gay and the Justice Department’s acting assistant attorney general for the civil division, surprised many when he said the Obama administration wouldn’t defend DOMA on any basis, including under rational basis review.

Last year, the Obama administration said it would no longer defend DOMA in court, on the basis that President Obama had determined that the anti-gay law fails heightened scrutiny because it discriminates against gay couples. Asked by Judge Juan Torruella whether the administration has a position on the rational basis test for the law, Delery replied, “We don’t.”

Delery’s position is significant because U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro in 2010 ruled in favor of plaintiffs on the basis that DOMA didn’t pass the rational basis standard review, or a rational means to a legitimate governmental end. Judges on the First Circuit will have to decide whether to affirm or overrule this decision.

Delery maintained that the name “DOMA” itself indicates that the anti-gay law was intended to discriminate against LGBT families. "It was a defense against something, and that something was same-sex couples," Delery said.

Defending the anti-gay law in federal appeals court was Paul Clement, the former solicitor general in the George W. Bush Administration. House Speaker John Boehner hired Clement last year to advocate for DOMA on behalf of the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which voted along party lines to take up defense of the law.

24 February 2012

House of Representative Republican leadership are appealing the Wednesday federal court ruling that found a key section of the Defense of Marriage Act to be unconstitutional, reports The Hill.

The action by the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which moved on behalf of GOP leaders, will send the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, which earlier this month ruled against a ban on gay marriage in California.

George W. Bush appointee Judge Jeffrey White found the DOMA unconstitutional in the Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management decision. He wrote that it was unconstitutional to offer healthcare benefits to heterosexual couples while denying the same benefits to same-sex couples.

When the suit was originally filed, the Department of Justice was set to challenge Golinski in court, but that changed last year when the Obama administration said it would no longer defend DOMA. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) then took up the fight by hiring a private law firm to represent the House Bipartisan Legal Adviser Group.

Judge White's ruling came in a case brought by Lambda Legal on behalf of Karen Golinski, a federal court employee denied spousal health coverage for her wife. The battle dates to 2008 when Golinski, a 20-year employee of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sought to enroll her wife in the employee health plan.

The statute's provision denying same-sex spousal benefits was also declared unconstitutional in a July 2012 Massachusetts case. That ruling is on appeal before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.

And only last week: Attorney General Eric Holder informed congressional leadership that the Justice Department would not defend a similar section of DOMA that bars same-sex couples from receiving military benefits.